HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/01/2011, - 2010 PROIJECTS San Luis Obispo City Council 2010 RTP Projected Revenues
Focused Public Opinion Poll
S SITo 11
• Supplemental Funding Assessment
_ noa
rM _.
\o. o $18 B >,
Isan Luis ONspo Co 11 of Goxemnients
\�. February 1,2011 � ...
gt rM
o
2010 RTP Projected Revenue
UCt
� i� Hiahway Accomplishments
We 1.��.-1":7
Regio �I Widenings,Redlgnmenfs.and AIoIBary Lanes
Highways Cuseta Grads Widening
Ro Maintenance r 41 maligllmem and bridge(Atascedero)
,nPs. • 101 Am Lame(4)(Piamo Beach I Arroyo Grande)
Transit • lot Aux Lanes(SLO City: Madonna to Marsh)
�.
`� Interchanges
707!47(Ataeeatlero)
^e '0., f18B w�t4"111ow(funded with ARRA)Nipomo
Highways . VngNlpono)
t0a)*(PBIAG/GB)
Non-Neto \w....� 10 (P"o Beach)
Regio.J 10 (Wnddo,but delayed)SLO city
Routes • 707146E(Pall Rofilm)
.q 101 I46W Plumb 7 Wkxo Roblee).
2010 RTP Projected Revenues CTC 2010 Annual Report
Highway Improvements Key Findings
R ECT CANDIDATE$ a State's transportation system continues to
Dces la,�mPe(101rok.NB a se mm
any
deteriorate
t Aux nem(Pmdo t°wdsnm)
RI„E°�,°°��"W'°db"Imp; d e Federal Highway Trust Fund is insolvent
RIMname Ov.mmss.y
e'Gw^Y �mw"- a SB 375 requires funding to succeed
ICIAuz Lams d) SB
B. '.
rAed°"m-Bm.d, e.C11 vw revenue sources needed
\Tative financing
e Inn ti \project delivery.
Ina Irnrlt Total An 2f 3F•Ycs.. N�
INemhange Impmcmeles 15 3 �\
comm!enPm�emm,s. ,z s b.
Amit" Lore en rmernems 9 2 Y
Projected State Funding Allocations Regional Route Accomplishments
• Strastseepas and landeceped madimm
—_�--—•--_��~ • Cbea R bib lams
• ShoWdem
• Lefr and right tum pockets
Capacity projects
°� • Opemllonal Improvements
Roundabout,and IntsrseNon Improvements
"y, / �• circ '"Q
r and Frontaps extensions,
sepia • �\
BHA \ Recently
Is •\ \ •Celle
Joaquin Realignments
\\ \ •Orcud Road At-Grade Xing and widening
———-•—n--- —r—-.— -.- - - -�� •Santa Barbara St.widening
�� •Mid Higuera widening Ph i
tilU=5uu 14ph.ay AC[a.1 T(W=T.Wx fmpca.Rebel l.d �. •South SL Road Diet
'� •Buckley Road Realignment(east)
2010 RTP Projected Revenues Non-Motorized Accomplishments
Regional Routes
PROJECT CANDIDATES : Boardwa8re
H ECT St. DID Promenades
Pradc Bnd,e M 51 Creek MuRI-Um Trane
Broad 51.Med..
• Recreational Class I Trolls
Ondo Rd Emmen • Park and Rb•Lora
Orc Re Wdening • Land Acgual loue
B,ucknY Rd freemen lwen)
Cornnaard/w Unmrmm.rco Recently completed
Md Mqu.a Wmvg(Meeh-Smeh) � Q
Same Barter,widervng Ph z •Marro Rd Bike Blvd
Same F•E .mic Rwlgnm•nl �\\\\ •Broad SL Bike Lanes
Or°a.Tenk Farm Imer.mon •RR Safely Trail to Cal Poly
$650M•requested in°ave:rds Tam Farm masnlrg
•Bob Jones Trail(south of Prado)
Bmkny Rancwhish
E,a \ •RR Safety Trail Phase 3
2596 Rf61M Froom Ranch Emm°n
available
Tankread/Soah.tl Imu.nn,ice.pre �•�� •S. n 1 trail
sidewalks
75%unfundaisk, Bova M idnz Phase 2 n Karo~� •Gass 1 Vail-Marsh to Madonna
:1
2010 RTP Projected Revenues 2010 RTP Projected Revenues
track„ Non-Motorized Transit
ropuested
IT% TZlW •Past 30 yea ,transit varices doubled lo the replan.
suable PROJECT CANDIDATES n
RR Salary Tail hD(LMR W 0.1.msr
un/unfyablo Rob Joma(LMR I n 101 BM Beal •t5dOM farb" g*4 so purpmss
RR Selly Tnd/US 101 BMga No see i His ext 26,hims is passesi.
Cess daemon Pre •45%Increase of regional transit services and
Bob Juma Tree(Octagon Baron S.L. 8%expensbn of local flied rotas.
ma
O )Odayon Baro PhR 1%expemlon W Pmalramb
Boa Jonas Tnll(wmrFnstr Te LdVR) \
e^ad,Rd Pnd I w tlnmrmindetl
�`• Prado Rd PnR 4`
Vanua Bim path and tail.,mems
Laguna Lem
. Pelona crack
101(wast ede Ment to Broad) \
UPRR°easings
Lawrence
Iroaaralway P
RR Selly Tmil i t
2
2010 RTP Projected Revenues Projected Revenue
Road Maintenance Concerns And Conclusions
No OR Reduced earmarks and no All Future e6E widening phases
• Leverage for Caltrans$ In Question
$1.1 B identified as needed to improve ALL local roads. No Increases to existing or new
S624M assumed.
revenues High Cost Interchanges and
Some fudsdichon would see improvement Recent Legislation provides change Highway projects will be difficult
Some would see lunhw degradation and uncertainty,but no$ to fund and will require,
some Jurisdictions faced with need m reconstruct largo pan of road significant local S
tem. ':Transportation Reauthorization
Ovef:an ratlirectwn of'Genwal Funds'es offer programs of Loral delays;restructuring;reductions
y Past Gen'1 Fund contributions now Regional Route funding may
T. hie Funds b Public Trane would resull in degrading diminish further
condeid overly optimistic..
(cont'd) Projected Revenue Overall Funding Conclusion:
Concerns And Conclusions
Expect reductions to state and Delivery of fewer Improvements
Federal Funding Programs and I and more delays for Nom
Competitive Grants,sources I Motorized projects: 1. Previously projected revenues now appear
.Bikes and Trails overly optimisticand a significant reduction($
Growth of Federal Transit funding ! Downtown Enhancements, and Projects)should be anticipated.
expected to be Rater than •Landscaped medians
assumed
Landscaped
STA projections:Uncertain \�:� nnOt rely on State or Federal Govt's for
'Urban;areas definitions may Transit Services will be in onal bailouts
jeopardize N.County status and
decline. \
$700k)yr.(and S.County 7).
Redirection of Gen'l Fund$away Road Maintenance will be in
from StJRd.Maintenance decline. `y
Next Steps
SLOCOG Board approved polling the public Released RFP for Opinion Polling for.
to identify transportation investment Projects and Improvements
priorities and use this information to
prepare fora future: Programs and Services
Assess Supplemental Funding Options:
M M1f hout su lemental fundingreductions QRegional Impact Fees
\,\Local Option Gas Tax
\\AR L�al option Sales Tax
o With s'iwolemental funding. vele Registration Fees
3